Scotus Is Going To Hear It / DC Gun Ban : MERGED

This is a discussion on Scotus Is Going To Hear It / DC Gun Ban : MERGED within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; www.foxnews.com is reporting scotus is going to hear the case !!!!...

" CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen says. "If the Court sides with D.C. and offers a narrow interpretation of the Second Amendment, we'll see more gun control. If the justices side with the gun owner here, gun control measures around the country will be in jeopardy."

Damm they granted cert to hear any part of the case . Now i will re read everything tomorrow , but a grant of cert is likely to go twards freedom with this court . IMHO the court will without a dobut decide that the 2nd is an individual right , but the question we all want to know is just what are reasonable restrictions of said right . That q will make many more cases for the scous , but for the first time they are taking up the issue . Interesting times .... as the old chineese curse says lol

Make sure you get full value out of today , Do something worthwhile, because what you do today will cost you one day off the rest of your life .
We only begin to understand folks after we stop and think .

Is it possible that they can rule in favor of Heller w/o that being a de-facto statement regarding "the militia is everyone" ?

I'm sure they'd like to decide in favor of Heller but on the caveat that it is not to be misconstrued ... can anyone think of some leftist gymnastics that would allow a judgement for Heller but at the same time NOT imply something regarding individual rights?

I am not holding my breath but - the outcome is going to be more than a little important in the general sense.

Much rides on it.

What rides on it? Even with a win, I doubt things will change that much. Outright bans might be rejected, but as long as "reasonable regulation" is allowed, what difference does that make? Ok, so DC and Chicago residents are not banned from owing a handgun -- rather, they would likely fall into the draconian NYC-style rules, which are essentially not very different.

So, aside from the tiny handful of places upshifting from "outrageously oppressive" into "merely NYC-level oppressive," what difference do we see this making?

I don't see this leading to mass-scale repeal of any existing gun laws, aside from total bans which are irrelevant to most of us here.

Is it possible that they can rule in favor of Heller w/o that being a de-facto statement regarding "the militia is everyone" ?

I'm sure they'd like to decide in favor of Heller but on the caveat that it is not to be misconstrued ... can anyone think of some leftist gymnastics that would allow a judgement for Heller but at the same time NOT imply something regarding individual rights?

UHHHH YEAH.....

the term Reasonable Restrictions.......Which SCOTUS is known for BTW.

That might be even worse, now you open the door for AWB bans, capacity bans, to some politician in VA it may not be "Reasonable" to own a Semi auto.

According to some states aka NEW YORK, CAli, NJ etc......reasonable may mean freaking blackpowder guns, I don't think this will affect us at all in the short term but down the road if SCOTUS uses the term REASONABLE that could be disasterous.

"Society never advances. It recedes as fast on one side as it gains on the other. It undergoes continual change; but this change is not [an improvement]. For everything that is given, something is taken." Ralph Waldo Emerson

"A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the continuance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed."
Is this hard to understand? Then why does it get unintelligible to some people when 5 little words are changed?